I came across the ambulance and staff attending a person down on the PSP where it runs alongside Loftus Street, West Perth. This is the section that connects one side of the freeway to other just to the west of the infamous City West section. There where a few cyclists there, but I have no idea what happened.

I am pretty sure but not 100% that the lady on the ground is a pedestrian as I didn't see a bike to go with her. That said there was a helmet on the wall but I think that belongs to the cyclist standing in the background in the shot of the lady on the ground.

I ride this section quite a lot. I can take a good guess and say the pedestrian walked out of the tunnel section perpendicular to the path you ride down, didn't look left or right (nearly everyone does this) and was struck by a cyclist who refused to slow down through there, since its a bit of a rush to get the green light on either end. :S

If I was injured in an accident one of the last things that i would want is some random cycling past with his camera on and putting footage of me on the internet without my permission. I think you continually doing this is highly offensive and shows a lack of class. I personally would appreciate it if you would cease

Vivifyer wrote:I ride this section quite a lot. I can take a good guess and say the pedestrian walked out of the tunnel section perpendicular to the path you ride down, didn't look left or right (nearly everyone does this) and was struck by a cyclist who refused to slow down through there, since its a bit of a rush to get the green light on either end. :S

Whilst I don't know what occurred in this instance sadly this sort of outcome or worse (two deaths in the last couple of years in WA) can come from pedestrian/cyclist interactions. To me this is areminder that we need to share the paths with care for all concerned.

A closer look and you'll see an MTB in the flower bed. Appears to be a bike Vs bike incident. An accident by all accounts, unpleasant for all parties involved. What happens in the public domain is 'public' and the footage is the property of the owner, beit a photo or video. Needless flame of Aushiker, but you are entitled to your own opinion.

Last edited by MilkRacer on Sat Jan 19, 2013 8:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MilkRacer wrote:A closer look and you'll see an MTB in the flower bed. Appears to be a bike Vs bike incident. An accident by all accounts, unpleasant for all parties involved. What happens in the public domain is 'public' and the footage is the property of the owner, beit a photo or video. Needless bash of Aushiker, but you are entitled to your own opinion.

MilkRacer wrote:A closer look and you'll see an MTB in the flower bed. Appears to be a bike Vs bike incident. An accident by all accounts, unpleasant for all parties involved. What happens in the public domain is 'public' and the footage is the property of the owner, beit a photo or video. Needless flame of Aushiker, but you are entitled to your own opinion.

I didn't suggest the footage wasn't his property just that I find it disrespectful. It was not a needless flame - it was an opinion. Your raising my concern as a flame is more of a flame if truth be told.

If Aushiker wants to raise awareness of this area or remind people of the dangers of cycling he doesn't need to do it with a video of people after the event. A simple written post would suffice i would have thought. If the footage is useful and shows fault or cause then present it to the appropriate people ... Otherwise it is just some nosey people gawking after the event and seeing if they can spot 'a bike in the flower bed'. You may not agree with my opinion an that's fine ... I hope you are never in a situation where someone wishes to video your misfortune and place it over the Internet to comfirm whether you really think it is an ok thing to do or not.

Once a person leaves private property there are no laws restricting filming or photography of them, beyond those relating to harassment and stalking. There are laws that relate to the usage of peoples' likenesses. Reportage such as this is clearly acceptable legally.

There is nothing sensational or voyeuristic about the video. With the camera movement, distance and backlighting you'd have a very tough time identifying anybody at the scene. Andrew clearly didn't stick around. I can't see anything morally awry with the video.

The video conveys something of the risks of riding PSP's which can't be written. War photography it ain't but the impact of an ambulance filling the path, the bystanders and paramedics express something which can't be captured easily in words.

We do seem to be suffering from inflated ideas about our need for privacy. Is it that we all think we're celebrities? The fact is that most of us are completely (and disappointingly) anonymous. No-one really gives a damn about us until we do something special like date Liz Hurley or fall off our bike.

I [meaning me] think you continually doing this is highly offensive and shows a lack of class.

To contribute to a factual discussion. I can only recall coming across two incidents and posting videos of same since I joined YouTube in November 2006 [I have uploaded 148 videos in that time according to YouTube] so not sure how that equates to continuously posting videos of incidents such as the one in this video.

As to the video of note I did review it before uploading it as I do have concerns about identifying injured persons and I came to the view that the person could not be identified. If that was an incorrect judgement I am happy to edit the video to correct that, but I note Rob's comments and given my respect for his expertise I will probably go with that. That said a simple polite raising of any concerns is all that is required for a further review to take place.

That notwithstanding I don't consider video this is any worse that what is often shown on the TV news and the like and I personally have a strong view that cycling safety is a matter that should be discussed and hence have no intentions of not continuing to raise such matters, including via videos, more so given the majority by far of my videos involve myself, including some of myself making errors.

CheersAndrew

Last edited by Aushiker on Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

I have reviewed this thread, watched the video and read the reports and find nothing objectionable in the OP or most of the following discussion. I am not impressed with the usage of a specific word in regards to this thread and have removed all posts related to it and following discussion.

Naturally enough, members disagreeing with this decision are free to apply to the Admin for further review.

Shaun

...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.London Boy 29/12/2011

RobertFrith wrote:Once a person leaves private property there are no laws restricting filming or photography of them, beyond those relating to harassment and stalking. There are laws that relate to the usage of peoples' likenesses. Reportage such as this is clearly acceptable legally.

There is nothing sensational or voyeuristic about the video. With the camera movement, distance and backlighting you'd have a very tough time identifying anybody at the scene. Andrew clearly didn't stick around. I can't see anything morally awry with the video.

The video conveys something of the risks of riding PSP's which can't be written. War photography it ain't but the impact of an ambulance filling the path, the bystanders and paramedics express something which can't be captured easily in words.

We do seem to be suffering from inflated ideas about our need for privacy. Is it that we all think we're celebrities? The fact is that most of us are completely (and disappointingly) anonymous. No-one really gives a damn about us until we do something special like date Liz Hurley or fall off our bike.

Hope the cyclist is OK.

I never said it was against the law - I don't know why people keep saying this!!!

Robert you would clearly know a lot more about celebrity than me ... Haven't you made a living out of being a professional voyeur?

I [meaning me] think you continually doing this is highly offensive and shows a lack of class.

To contribute to a factual discussion. I can only recall coming across two incidents and posting videos of same since I joined YouTube in November 2006 [I have uploaded 148 videos in that time according to YouTube] so not sure how that equates to continuously posting videos of incidents such as the one in this video.

As to the video of note I did review it before uploading it as I do have concerns about identifying injured persons and I came to the view that the person could not be identified. If that was an incorrect judgement I am happy to edit the video to correct that, but I note Rob's comments and given my respect for his expertise I will probably go with that. That said a simple polite raising of any concerns is all that is required for a further review to take place.

That notwithstanding I don't consider video this is any worse that what is often shown on the TV news and the like and I personally have a strong view that cycling safety is a matter that should be discussed and hence have no intentions of not continuing to raise such matters, including via videos, more so given the majority by far of my videos involve myself, including some of myself making errors.

CheersAndrew

Hi Andrew,I didn't watch this video. .. The last one of people suffering and distressed was enough for me. I don't know about what you have posted since before the war, but after having only just returned to this forum after a hiatus I have seen 2 videos in short succession. .. I was hoping it would not be a trend.

Clearly we have a different view on this, so we can agree to disagree.

Aushiker wrote:Whilst I don't know what occurred in this instance sadly this sort of outcome or worse (two deaths in the last couple of years in WA) can come from pedestrian/cyclist interactions. To me this is a reminder that we need to share the paths with care for all concerned.

Okay, for my own purposes i want to be clear on where this accident occurred and if it is a black spot for cyclists. Is this the path that runs on the east side of Loftus St south of the freeway and meets the underpass (where the ambulance parked) from Bermondsey St? So the underpass that connects West Perth to City West. From what I recall the approach to that tunnel is almost blind on the east side and has a section of path with a fast descent crossing close in front of the west side approach. And has this hazard been reported to the powers that be? That path gets a lot of traffic, foot and pedal.

just4tehhalibut wrote:Okay, for my own purposes i want to be clear on where this accident occurred and if it is a black spot for cyclists. Is this the path that runs on the east side of Loftus St south of the freeway and meets the underpass (where the ambulance parked) from Bermondsey St? So the underpass that connects West Perth to City West.

From my opening post ...

PSP where it runs alongside Loftus Street, West Perth. This is the section that connects one side of the freeway to other just to the west of the infamous City West section.

I think we are talking the same place. The location is shown on this Google map.